The differences in a WW1 that starts in 1900 vs 1914

Just from a technological standpoint how would this have impacted how the war went along?

Machine guns but no airplanes, are tanks still developed?
 
No Haber process is the real big one. Absent that you are dependent on the goodwill of the British Empire for access to Nitrates which are needed for explosives. So unless the UK stays out any world war would end in two years at most
 

BooNZ

Banned
No Haber process is the real big one. Absent that you are dependent on the goodwill of the British Empire for access to Nitrates which are needed for explosives. So unless the UK stays out any world war would end in two years at most

Agreed, although Britain at this time is messing around South Africa, so is less likely to be proactive in Europe at that time - Britain was still flirting with an alliance with Germany.
 
For starters, the Germans didn't have those big ol' guns that blew the Belgian forts, so any Schlieffen plan would get stalled on the nearest fortress.
 
biggest different is the alliance system Bismarck envision
The 1904 Entente cordiale was not sign yet, meaning Britain and France wer NOT in Alliance against German Empire.
While alliance between France and Russian was sign in 1894.
and Italy was in Alliance with German Empire in 1900.

So there is a realistic chance that Britain remains neutral in 1900, if War brake out.
 
Last edited:

jahenders

Banned
Just from a technological standpoint how would this have impacted how the war went along?

Machine guns but no airplanes, are tanks still developed?

Well, if it occurs in 1900 it's unclear that it really becomes a "World War." It might be a variation on the Balkan Wars.

Maybe you have A-H and Serbia, Russia gets involved, Germany gets involve, and France gets involved. That could be a big war, but might not expand beyond that.
The UK might sit it out and focus on Africa.
The US is relatively less capable and isn't likely to get involved if A) the UK isn't involved, and B) no one is interfering with US shipping.
 

BooNZ

Banned
biggest different is the alliance system Bismarck envision
The 1904 Entente cordiale was not sight yet, meaning Britain and France wer NOT in Alliance against German Empire.
While alliance between France and Russian was sign in 1894.
and Italy was in Alliance with German Empire in 1900.

So there is a realistic chance that Britain remains neutral in 1900, if War brake out.

Yeah, Britain is sitting this one out initially because (a) relations with Germany better, (b) relations with French worse, (c) a bit busy in Africa and (d) no German plan to violate Belgium neutrality. Without Britain, Italy will either stay neutral or join the CP. In 1900 Serbia was a client state of A-H, while Bulgaria was a client state of the Ottomans - Romania, Ottomans and Japan would likely be CP leaning neutrals initially.

A-H is likely to perform far, far better in this scenario - OTL its relative strength compared to other European powers declined dramatically from 1900 and OTL it had to fight 3-4 fronts after Germany decided to go balls deep into Belgium. In this scenario A-H is relatively far stronger and is able to focus the entirety of its strength against much weaker Russian armies - with probably additional support from Germany.
 
It depends, say the issue over Samoa had not been resolved by a hurricane you could have had Germany the UK and the US go to war at the say time. It would have been an interesting conflict right there.
 
Britain will attack Germany if Germany attacks Belgium, nothing change there.

The main difference is that the French Navy will have to protect the channel but at the same time in 1900 French are un a MUCH better situation as they have their new 75mm gun (germans are one generation behind), their new rifle and Germany has a much lower heavy artillery park. Things appear to be much more complicated for Germans.
 

BooNZ

Banned
Britain will attack Germany if Germany attacks Belgium, nothing change there.

The main difference is that the French Navy will have to protect the channel but at the same time in 1900 French are un a MUCH better situation as they have their new 75mm gun (germans are one generation behind), their new rifle and Germany has a much lower heavy artillery park. Things appear to be much more complicated for Germans.

Aside from the French 75mm light artillery piece, which was still years ahead of its time - the German superiority would have been substantially similar to 1914 i.e. higher enlistment standards, more and superior NCOs, more and superior heavy artillery. The Germans would probably need to negate the superiority of the French 75mm by taking the French 'to the mat' i.e. trench warfare.

While the Germans would have no fast firing artillery, there would also be no Schlieffen plan, so no Britain. The French would be without Britain, without Belgium, without Italy, without Serbia, without Japan. It's only partner would be a relatively far weaker than 1914 Russia, against a relatively far stronger than 1914 A-H.

The Germans are at a geographic disadvantage on naval matters, but the French would need to be wary of the Italian and Japanese naval assets if those states also joined the fray - most likely on the CP side..
 

oberdada

Gone Fishin'
1900 vs 1914 is easy: 1914 wins, unless it is just 1900 Britain against 1914 Austria-Hungaria...

And this should go into the ASB Forum...
 
The Haber process is the key factor. Combatants are far more vulnerable to blockade than OTL so Britain can be decisive without landing a single man on the Continent. The German Navy is far weaker than in 1914 and weaker than the French but can the French blocakde the German coast. If they can then Germany is screwed, if not then in the absence of Britain France is screwed.
 
With Russia still a long way from modernizing its army, AH has less to fear if Russia meddles in Serbia.

As for airplane's, reliable airplanes (e.g. Bleriot) were not ready until 1910. Even then, they were limited to recce and correcting artillery fire because they could not carry heavy machine guns.

ITTL most artillery spotting would still be done from hydrogen balloons.
 
No Unrestricted Submarine Warfare will span a host of political differences. Teddy Roosevelt might be spoiling to get into the war; he was rather quick with the military. Germany can't easily provoke the USA to the point of war--but if Teddy decides that he wants Canada, then Britain might need to be careful of neutral rights...
 
Top